Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
On The Bus

Coronavirus Isle of Man

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

 

Ot thirdly we can put restrictions in place and then lift them for the Mountain Rd, say from 12 midday Saturday to midnight Sunday. Even one way maybe. Then everybody knows what the score is, you can either hoon or stay off the Mountain Rd for that period.

The only proviso I'd put in place is that a la Nurburgring, users need to have private medical and accident recovery insurance in place before they hoon. So that I and the rest of the taxpayers don't have to stump up when the dicks run out of talent.

I’ve advocated this since around 2008 for TT. Turn the Mountain into a toll road and treat it for what it actually is - a fairground ride. Charge for it, and run it exactly the same way as the Ring.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

3 hours ago, woolley said:

It's not nonsense when you understand, as I'm sure you do, the meaning of derestricted. It means simply that a speed limit has not been set so drive according to the condition of the road. That's all it means. So it is not carte blanche to do what you like. There are derestricted roads upon which you could be charged with dangerous driving at 30mph. Having said that,  I must admit that for the first time ever I am coming round to the idea of a national limit. 

A speed limit, based on the design speed of the route, is part of the risk assessment for a multi modal environmen

2 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Well it's a small number people isnt it? That's the point.

We don't need to create speed limits because of this small number of drivers.

I'm simply pointing out to you that not everyone who travels a bit quicker up on the Mountain Road is necessarily a risk or an idiot.

You were the one that started quoting peoples driving then how many people die.  When in reality neither you nor I can actually remember the last car fatality on the Mountain Road.  They've been bike fatalities. 

The problem you perceive exists actually doesn't. 

We don’t need to have a drink drive limit for a small number of drivers

We don’t need to have seatbelt laws for a small number of drivers

we don’t need to have mobile phone laws for a small number of drivers.

They are called the ‘fatal 4’ with good reason. These are globally the cause of the majority of serious and fatal collisions

 

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

But that's effectively what the strategy has been for at least the last 50 years - more and more different speed limits covering more road in ever shorter sections.  Great for the manufacturers of road signs (have you just invested?), not very successful in reducing road accidents at the same rate as the UK.  Producing confusing loads of confusing and ever-changing regulations that they don't understand themselves is a speciality of the Manx Government as we've seen recently, but I'm not sure that they need to be encouraged to produce more.  And with such a prescriptive approach to the 'right' speed for every section of road, the danger is that that people treat it as the optimum not the maximum.

Of course the real issue with speed limits is always enforcement and without the use of technology to do so, that is always going to be patchy, inconsistent and possibly biased.  Which obviously suits some people just fine.

Nope - there hasn’t been a strategy and that has been the problem. It has been pretty much as you describe - a piss in the wind approach.

Only on the Isle of Man would you spend hundreds of thousands re-profiling Windy and Brandish, where a grands worth of road signs and a 40 limit would have solved both. 

We now have a strategy. What we don’t have it appears is a Road Safety Department which is actually delivering on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

Not really Roger.   You don't have to drive at 30 to be considerate to other road users. That's just mamby pamby snowflake attitudes really.:whatever:

You have a remarkable ability to both miss and prove the point at the same time.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I agree about kinetic forces.

But the risk of accidents at speed lies much more with people driving unsuitable shit heaps at 80 more than someone driving a purpose built modern sports car at a ton.

What a guy. Lord flasheart has nothing on you.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

When surveyed, most  drivers say they are safer-that is  have less accidents, than the average.

At first glance this seems nonsensical - how can the “majority”  be better than the “average”.

Yet it turns out to be correct- 7O % or so have less accidents than the  average.

The answer is that  a small number of drivers are responsible for a large number of  the accidents -theirs are repeated and  frequent.

Perhaps this  group  should have to fund their intensive retraining ,education and testing. Those who prove irremediable despite these measures should  not allowed to drive again.

Edited by hampsterkahn
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I agree about kinetic forces.

But the risk of accidents at speed lies much more with people driving unsuitable shit heaps at 80 more than someone driving a purpose built modern sports car at a ton.

Doesnt the iom have an mot now?... In the 80s there were a lot of heaps runnin around

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WTF said:

leave taxi drivers alone.

Like all the best humour its foundation lies in truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, cHarlie Grant said:Doesnt the iom have an mot now?... In the 80s there were a lot of heaps runnin around

MOTs  have little relevance regarding accident prevention, though the Test succeeded in clearing a lot of pre-war bangers off the road in the early sixties.

The vast majority of accidents are caused by driver error.

Mechanical problems   as the underlying causes of accidents are unusual.

Apart from the  effects  of drugs and alcohol, drivers crash when they lack  skill and experience, and it  also happens when their attention is  distracted, especially with emotional stress- relationship problems, and worries about job and money.

We should not drive after alcohol, but  we should also not be driving when we are very upset, anxious, recently  bereaved,   or furiously angry or distracted by worry,- or by mobile devices-

 “ Sorry, I didn’t see you, mate!”is often said to motorcycle crash victims.They did look - but did not “ see!”.

The commonest “mechanical “ cause of accidents always involves, “That difficult nut that holds the steering wheel”.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎13‎/‎2020 at 9:35 AM, TheTeapot said:

Its a mindset thing. Like how you've just posted about ignoring any speed limit anyway. You might be a 'good' driver with a decent car, I dunno, but if you're arrogant enough to think you can just blast it then I'd say you're likely to be the problem rather than the solution.

Safe money is that he isn't. More likely to be one of the knobs displaying R plates exceeding 60mph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

Safe money is that he isn't. More likely to be one of the knobs displaying R plates exceeding 60mph

My money is on him driving a BMW.

Whenever I witness knobheadish driving it is usually a BMW. Not that there are not good considerate BMW drivers, there are plenty but I think the whole rear wheel drive advertising thing with BMWs does tend to attract a type of driver that thinks "Oh good, rear wheel drive means I will be able to get the rear end out a bit" which they will lack the skill to do when they get the car but it will not stop them from driving like a dick the rest of the time because they could get the rear end to hang out if they wanted to.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Neil Down said:

Safe money is that he isn't. More likely to be one of the knobs displaying R plates exceeding 60mph

The safe money is on you being a OAMIL.  Horrific.

Hopefully you report those R plate speeders:thumbsup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Boris Johnson said:

My money is on him driving a BMW.

Whenever I witness knobheadish driving it is usually a BMW. Not that there are not good considerate BMW drivers, there are plenty but I think the whole rear wheel drive advertising thing with BMWs does tend to attract a type of driver that thinks "Oh good, rear wheel drive means I will be able to get the rear end out a bit" which they will lack the skill to do when they get the car but it will not stop them from driving like a dick the rest of the time because they could get the rear end to hang out if they wanted to.

BMWs seem to be driven by people with a few quid to spend and prefer to take care of them.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

BMWs seem to be driven by people with a few quid to spend and prefer to take care of them.   

Exactly - knobheads:D

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...